U.S. v. Baldwin, 54 M.J. 308

First Principles: Constitutional Matters: Cruel and Unusual Punishment

1. appellant failed to demonstrate that the averred conditions of her post-trial confinement amounted to a violation of Article 55 where there was an absence of a showing of pain or injury, as well as an absence of a showing of punitive intent on the part of prison officials
2. appellant’s claim of improper punishment under Article 55, UCMJ, and under the Eighth Amendment was rejected because appellant did not demonstrate that the conditions of her confinement were more adverse than those faced by civilian prisoners whose claims of cruel and unusual punishment have been rejected by other courts

Trial Stages: Post-Trial Hearings: DuBay / Factfinding Hearings

1. where appellant’s allegations were sufficient to raise a post-trial issue of unlawful command influence, a DuBay hearing was required to develop a full record of material facts in order to determine appellant’s entitlement to relief

Trial Stages: Appeals: Standards of Review, Burdens, etc.

1. the quantum of evidence necessary to raise unlawful command influence is the same as that required to submit a factual issue to the trier of fact; it must, however, be more than mere speculation

Miscellaneous Matters: Command Influence: Generally

1. where appellant’s allegations were sufficient to raise a post-trial issue of unlawful command influence, a DuBay hearing was required to develop a full record of material facts in order to determine appellant’s entitlement to relief

Miscellaneous Matters: Command Influence: Members

1. the use of command meetings to purposefully influence the members in determining a court-martial sentence violates Article 37, UCMJ; the mere confluence of the timing of such meetings with members during ongoing courts-martials and their subject matter dealing with court-martial sentences can require a sentence rehearing

Miscellaneous Matters: Command Influence: Burdens

1. the quantum of evidence necessary to raise unlawful command influence is the same as that required to submit a factual issue to the trier of fact; it must, however, be more than mere speculation
2. in the absence of evidence to the contrary, appellant’s allegations were sufficient to raise a post-trial issue of unlawful command influence where: (1) appellant’s post-trial statement was based on her own observations; (2) the post-trial statement was detailed in nature; and (3) the record of trial, containing an unexplained delay at a specific point in time, could be viewed as tending to corroborate an allegation that there was a command meeting at that time